“Incrementalism is how we slide into participation by imperceptible degrees so that there is never the sense of a frontier being crossed.”

—-

Jonathan Glover

============

“Progress lies not in enhancing what is, but in advancing toward what will be.”

—-

Kahlil Gibran

====================

Well.

Incrementalism is a virus. And once you catch it is a sonuvabitch to cure.

I, personally, believe the entire business world, including new business incubators, has this virus. Incrementalism has seeped its way not only into mainstream business but also mainstream ‘innovation’ pipelines.

Yeah. Innovations too.

I dare any of you to walk the halls of your local business incubation center and find a real, “break the etch-a-sketch” idea in there. If you are lucky, you will find one. The majority of innovation ideas these days, incubators as well as established companies, is all about incrementally leveraging from something existing.

Sure. They may claim its “unique” and “a whole new way of doing things” but the majority of the time, lets say 98% of the time, it is a derivative of something that exists. That is how far the incrementalism virus has reached into the business world.

But this post today isn’t about innovation. This is about how incrementalism just makes us sad. It makes us sad because if you embrace incrementalism that means you have given up on … well … something that is not incremental. You have given up on being able to do something big and risky and game changing. And, worst, you’ve given up on making any substantial decisions <because incrementalism is simply an excuse for not making a clear cut decision>.

Now.

You may not believe you have given it up because we, in the business world, actually cleverly use incrementalism to convince ourselves we are actually achieving big changes.

….. incrementalism dance ………

We do the dance of ‘small steps to achieve big change’ which is kind of some odd waltz in which we make the same moves over and over again and point to change as “we improved how we dance” <but we are still in the same place dancing with the same person dancing to the same music>.

To be clear.

Even I, someone who loves change and “shaking the etch-a-sketch” in business, have been sucked into the black hole of incrementalism.

We do an incredibly good job of convincing ourselves that big change is hard, shit, that any change is hard and almost impossible to do it is do difficult. Given that, we do an incredibly good job of convincing ourselves that the only way to effectively successfully implement change is through smaller thoughtful steps. All leading to, we do an incredibly good job of convincing ourselves of all that, in fact, so much so that’s all we do.

Look.

Big change is possible. You just need to be smart, thoughtful and choose the ‘big’ wisely and with open eyes. But nowadays we view ‘big’ as some place we need to work our way towards and not just something we do. Unfortunately, as soon as we step onto the incrementalism slippery slope it, more often than not, causes everyone to slide, unintentionally, into unchanging behavior <or microscopic change increments>. This means everyone does small thing after small thing which make everyone feel like they are changing and that shit is changing … uhm … all the while the world itself is changing faster.

This means in our incrementalism we are moving forward and, yet, falling behind. It’s like walking on a moving sidewalk in the wrong direction.

Maybe the worst part?

We do not even see the backwards effect of our supposed forward movement. This happens mostly because most of us suck at not only changing but perceiving change. We easily lose sight of any change as we focus on the incremental activity we have wholly embraced as ‘progress’ <because we say in our minds: “big change is impossible and this is the way to do it!”>.

The other very real danger of incrementalism is that while you have your head down focused on the incremental task at hand not only may the rest of the world be moving faster than you – it may even turn. So you will keep plugging away plodding down your incrementalism path and all the while the rest of the world is now trundling away in a completely different direction.

By the way … in business this is bad.

Anyway.

I will absolutely admit that most of the business world absolutely recognizes the importance of seeking to continuously reinvent and, yet, sadly mostly we are actually just going through the motions. The motions may look incredibly sensible but they really aren’t achieving any change of any significance.

===============

the term Incrementalism is also used as a synonym for Gradualism. Incrementalism is a method of working by adding to a project using many small incremental changes instead of a few (extensively planned) large jumps.

Logical incrementalism implies that the steps in the process are sensible.

============

I fully admit that change is hard <and it pays to be sensible>. And I fully admit that big change is even harder … and more risky <and it pays to be sensible>.

But that isn’t my point.

My point is that it seems like we have convinced ourselves in the business world that change is ALWAYS best achieved gradually and incrementally. We should always find the easy small steps and do them.

So what <you may be asking>?

This means we begin measuring the success of the business not by any real change but rather defining our usefulness and worthiness by measuring it in increments versus the past. Incrementalism more often than not doesn’t get measured by how much closer to the ‘big change’ you are but rather by how far you have gone from what you were.

Uhm.

That is nuts. And while it is nuts that is almost exactly how over 90% of business conduct business <and their change>. Worse? This incremental behavior decision making actually bleeds into incremental decision making in general. Everyone starts believing that a bold decision just isnt worth it when you know everyone feels comfortable with an incremental decision.

Look.

While I always advocate timely good big change, I certainly would advocate embracing incrementalism on occasion. Business change is, and as always been, about choice. You look around and choose where incrementalism may be most effective and where ‘big change’ is actually needed. In other words … for doing smart change … you do both within your business.

Yeah.

I can do both at the same time. This has two benefits:

Organization:all businesses need to be reinvented in some way. I cannot remember one business I have seen or been involved in that hadn’t established some routine that didn’t need to be changed significantly. Incrementalism steadies the organization by not destroying something but rather fine tuning it. Conversely when you tie big change to the organization elsewhere it energizes the organization that it is being smart <to not change everything> but bold <in that it is willing to make selective smart big changes>. Showing both is the best of both worlds.

The employee/individual: incrementalism is a virus almost like mononucleosis. It encourages employees to almost sleepwalk through the day. When you inject big change and encourage everyone to believe it can be done and develop a plan to show it can be done and activate people to start getting it done, individual employees are reminded that there IS something more than either the status quo or ‘incremental and gradual change’ <which they were struggling to discern from the everyday grind anyway>.

I don’t want to kill incrementalism but I certainly want to breathe new life into “big”.

Just know this about incrementalism … the problem is that incrementalism is seductively sleepy. It’s the Prozac of business strategy. All I can really suggest is that every business should stop taking Prozac on occasion and watch how the pulse of the company picks up … they may find that Life off of Prozac just isn’t that bad. More importantly, they may find they can shrug off the sadness of incrementalism and have a happier organization. And that is a good thing in business.

We chase a lot of things in business. We sometimes chase them so blindly and relentlessly we don’t even recognize the rabbit hole we have started running down.

Differentiation is one of those rabbit holes.

Now.

I have a warped perspective <it includes rabbit holes> with regard to differentiation and differentiating in the business world.

I think it’s a shit objective.

Ok.

It CAN be a shithole objective. But suffice it to say … I believe chasing differentiation is … well … yes … a rabbit hole.

To be clear.

I don’t dislike differentiation … and I believe a well differentiated sustainable idea can dominate a market. But. Chasing differentiation seems to take on some fairly absurd efforts to attain the objective. I worry about differentiation as an objective because it points people in the wrong direction.

If I were to kill this whole differentiation thing, I would begin by saying “define, define, define.”Define yourself with such a clear distinctive thought that permits you stand up and say ‘here is who I am.’

Here is the deal.

Sometimes you may look similar to someone else. But more often you will look like … well … you. And in a sometimes complex fragmented world where everyone is shouting how different they are <and people are becoming more & more cynical> distinctness can win. And more often than not you will also be … well … different. In addition … in today’s world about the only sustainable differentiation isn’t a thing … it is a … well … knowledge, thinking & what you have done with what you learn.

The meaningless rabbit hole. In our blind pursuit of differentiation we can make some fairly absurd decisions with regard to thoughtless specialization, nuanced differentiation and niche definition. In our blind pursuit of differentiation we can gleefully land on some ‘spot’ and declare differentiation victory only to have it all negated because of lack of alignment throughout all aspects of operations.

Attempted, or false/meaningless, differentiation is useless and distracting and a rabbit hole.

Bottom line on differentiation is reckless pursuit encourages us to lie to ourselves … convince ourselves of ‘true difference’ when it is simply meaningless differentiation. And therein lies the worst of the rabbit hole.

Pretending to not see the truth … or maybe <to be kinder> … to pretend it is what it isn’t.

—————

“… the person who pretends to not see the truth is committing something much worse than a mortal sin, which can only ruin one’s soul – but instead committing us all to lifetimes of pain.

The truth is not just something we bring to light to amuse ourselves; the truth is the axis munid, the dead center of the earth.

When it’s out of place nothing is right; everyone is in the wrong place; no light can penetrate. Happiness evades us and we spread pain and misery wherever we go. Each person, above all others, has an obligation to recognize the truth and stand by it.”

Jacque Silette

—————-

Many business people simply ignore truth as they pursue this elusive <and debatably poor objective> thing called differentiation. Far <far> too many business people embrace doubt and the possibility that a stupid belief might have something going for it in the pursuit of ‘differentiation’ … all the while completely ignoring something that makes you distinct <but possibly not different> … let’s call it ‘an obvious and rational truth’… ignoring it because they believe it will get you nowhere.

These are the meetings and discussions in which I often sit dumbfounded and silent and thinking ‘wow … the rabbit hole just gained a whole new crowd of loons.’

—-

“…I was calm on the outside but thinking all the time.”

A Clockwork Orange

———-

Our relentless pursuit of differentiating most often than not leads to an unimportant product feature <not what customers consider valuable>

–——-

“Differentiation is a unique quality, perceived or real, of a good or service that distinguish it from a competing good or service…”

Your Dictionary.com

——–

Look.

I fully realize that the need to be distinctive and competitive are the reasons why the company needs to think about differentiation. However, differentiation can take on so many faces there is no reason you should end up chasing down some rabbit hole for some elusive ‘this is what you MUST seek’ objective as defined by one expert <only to have another expert state unequivocally you need to chase another completely different shiny object>.

Suffice it to say, I can almost guarantee whenever someone brings up differentiation it is more often than not simply code for “please enter this rabbit hole.”

Oh.

The perfection rabbit hole. On a parallel course is a similar group chasing perfection … often ending up in the same rabbit hole as the differentiators <can get awful crowded in that business rabbit hole>. The pursuit of perfection is an insidious rabbit hole. Its stench seeps into the darkest corners of an organization. And while the stench is enough to make anyone’s stomach heave most organizations have people with no real ability and yet strive to maintain an aura of ability under the guise of ‘seeking perfection for the good of the organization.’

More good employees are actually LED into the perfection rabbit hole than employees who actually CHOOSE to dive into the perfection rabbit hole.

That said.

Organizations are built over this particular rabbit hole. Every organization. It is the unfortunate burden of every organization to deal with the pursuit of perfection.

Anyway.

————–

“Just because you took longer than others doesn’t mean you failed.”

=

Hassann

—————

Maybe that is my biggest point about rabbit holes and business. Some of the things we seek most in business … whether it be differentiation or perfection or whatever silly thing you have decided will better your business … always seem to take longer than what you want. We get impatient. And if we get really thoughtful about this whole impatience … we would realize that our aggravation is with Life and not any inability within ourselves <or even in assessment the foolish pursuit of this un-real reality objective>.

—

Note:

we SHOULD be more thoughtful about this more often … mostly because if we do not far too many of the wrong people get fired <the right ones> and too many of the wrong people <the wrong ones> get praised and encouraged to maintain the ‘pursuit’ for the good f the organization.

—

Regardless.

Life does not suffer fools lightly. Life is oblivious to your impatience <and relatively indifferent to you in general>. And Life bleeds into any and every organization.

How does Life deal with the fools and silly impatient people? Rabbit holes.

It gives us rabbit holes to chase after silly things and dive into in our relentless pursuit of attaining “it” and waste our lives wandering aimlessly within.

But here is where Business and personal Life diverge.

In personal Life you are responsible for the stupid choices you make. Choose to enter a rabbit hole and the issue is all yours to own. In business you can actually get shoved into a rabbit hole whether you want to or not.

All I can tell you is that when I hear someone leading a discussion about ‘how are we different’ and ‘what’s our differentiation?” I start swiveling my head around scanning for rabbit holes.

All I can tell you is that when I hear someone in the hallway espousing the need to pursue perfection I start swiveling my head around scanning for rabbit holes.

All I can tell you is that when I am in a meeting and someone is discussing both differentiation and perfection I don’t swivel my head … I just sigh … because I know I am already in a rabbit hole.

This building’s totally burning down and my, and my heart has slowly dried up.”

=

modest mouse

—

Well.

We all know people who always seem to have drama in their lives. These are the people who always seem to have an endless, and varied, array of crises … one after another … a seemingly endless <created> disaster after disaster … week after week … if not day after day. Unfortunately … I imagine we also know people like this in business.

Driving us crazy having us expend wasted energy chasing after things they are always suggesting are always awry … maybe not a full crisis … but shit that just is not right. Friends are just drama lovers but business people, especially managers, are brutal on effectiveness & morale.

Regardless.

Whether someone makes up a crisis or not … the difficulty, of course, is discerning between real disaster and created disaster.

It is actually with that difficulty <one which any and all of us struggle with> where the core issue resides: discerning how disaster defines you. For if you define yourself <in some aspects> by how you deal with a disaster … and the disaster is not real … well … then is your definition flawed? What I mean by that is:

1. some people are very very good at managing life & business and avoid a shitload of disasters & crises.

They are defined in people’s eyes one way.

2. Some people are very very good at not managing life so that they never avoid disasters and crises.

They are defined in people’s eyes one way.

3. Some people are very very good at simply managing <handling> disasters … as they arise.

They are defined in people’s eyes one way.

I say all that because we can’t simply bunch disasters and people up into one neat bundle. Yet … despite that … .created disaster or real disaster they seem to have something in common. Common? It’s kind of funny … okay interesting … how a disaster or a crisis gets our butts in gear. When faced with a disaster most people … well … make shit happen.

And, in general, we tend to make good shit happen. A disaster seems to <at least … tends to … > bring out the best in us.

Well.

Apparently <per some research> … at least some of us:

The ability to manage your emotions and remain calm under pressure has a direct link to your performance. Research<with like a million people as the base> found that 90% of top performers are skilled at managing their emotions in times of stress in order to remain calm and in control.

Research also clearly shows the havoc stress can have on one’s physical and mental health <such as a Yale study which found that prolonged stress causes degeneration in the area of the brain responsible for self-control>. The tricky thing about stress and the anxiety that comes with it is that it’s an absolutely necessary emotion.

Our brains are wired such that it’s difficult to take action until we feel at least some level of this emotional state. In fact, performance peaks under the heightened activation that comes with moderate levels of stress.

As long as the stress isn’t prolonged, it’s harmless.

Ok.

Regardless … this all means that disasters or crises tends to make shit happen. In fact … it shows us the best we can be <albeit it can also display us at our worst>.

Now. Sometimes our best is enough and sometimes it isn’t … but bring on a disaster or a good crisis and … well … you will find out pretty fast of your best is good enough. That said. Do we really need disasters in life?

<I found this thought in so many writings I almost began to believe it … almost ..>

To be clear … I do not believe that statement is true … but it sure sometimes feels that way watching the news and how many people live their lives and how a shitload of managers conduct themselves in business. However. I do believe disasters drive learning and uncover the real ‘truths.’

In fact … studies show over and over again that we seem to learn new things when disaster strikes and we deal with a crisis. Why? Well. Try this on for size.

–

“Disasters: the mind likes problems because they give you an identity of sorts.”

Eckhard Tolle

–

Eckhardt, the nutjob, also said this:

–

“Disregarding disasters takes the ability to recognize what is false within you.”

Ok. So maybe a disaster can be good because it forces the mind into problem solving mode <kind of like kicking it out of neutral and into a “survival gear”>. Disaster creates stress <insert your thought bubble here: “well … that just stated the obvious”> … uhm … but stress actually improves memory:

=

New research from the University of California, Berkeley, reveals an upside to experiencing moderate levels of stress.

But it also reinforces how important it is to keep stress under control. The study found that the onset of stress entices the brain into growing new cells responsible for improved memory. However, this effect is only seen when stress is intermittent. As soon as the stress continues beyond a few moments into a prolonged state, it suppresses the brain’s ability to develop new cells.

=

But, that said, I imagine the real discussion revolves around what is a real disaster or crisis and what is a created crisis <or what some expert calls – ‘dysfunction-challenge-obstacle within’>.

To be clear. This type of discussion isn’t just about the drama queen/king who walks the high school <or office> hallways … this reaches to the heights of leaders and leadership.

========

For example:

From “Crazy Rhythm” (1997), a memoir by former Nixon White House counsel Leonard Garment

Nixon was much more than ordinarily skilled in the gambler’s arts of patience, nerve, and timing; he was a lover of challenge and the excitement of crisis, an adept, like Houdini, forever surprising skeptics with his ability to escape from the political equivalent of double-barred safes dumped into rivers or burial under six feet of crushing dirt. Nixon—his ambitions lofty, his style lumpen—in the end trumped his enemies. And from this, for all his careful avoidance of reminders of the “Old Nixon” during his final twenty years of disciplined self-rehabilitation, he surely derived his greatest, most savage satisfaction.

Without Watergate, Nixon would likely have finished his term, floundered around as a depressed man in search of a crisis, and died earlier than he did. As it was, he took up the supreme struggle of his political life and fought, won, and wrote about it time and again, until he was finally buried with great public honor.

–

Well. This implies that escaping the inevitable changes that are demanded from facing disasters creates an odd dichotomy of attitudes and energy — the clashing of ones who seek to engage their ‘gambling skills’ versus the ones who seek to avoid the inevitable change <not just the outcomes> associated with disasters.

Suffice it to say that most of us do not embrace change. If anything … we go out of our way to avoid it. A normal reaction is to move away from the new and unfamiliar. I say that because disasters force change. They force action.

And typically they force the change in a boundaried existence – limited time and space <so you can’t avoid it>.

Oh.

As for that ‘engage their gambler skill’? We should note that unlike disaster, success is not a good teacher. Whoa. So disaster can be a good teacher <honing some thinking & learning skills> and success isn’t <creates a false sense of skill set>.

That thought may make you rethink buying that next “how do I learn the things of successful businesses/people” book. Why is success such a poor teacher? After success you typically give yourself a pat on your back and celebrate.

Oh. And start to be complacent <complacency is a wonderful strategy for failure or a disaster>.

On the other hand … disaster is good for learning because we start to learn better when things get a little rough. There is no complacency <because you are trying to survive> and we normally make the most important decision after setbacks and failures. The pain or disappointment of failure provides feedback and is an oddly good teacher that will provide us with strong reflective education.

—

“Success is a lousy teacher. It seduces smart people into thinking they can’t lose.”

Bill Gates

—

To be clear … success just doesn’t seduce smart people … it seduces all people.

Now.

To be fair.

I am not aware of anyone who has a 100% success rate in life <… well … I imagine it depends on how you define success>. Success is driven by perspective … and it is actually perspective that makes good disaster managers approach a crisis differently than the majority of us. Say what? Yup. They have a tendency to reframe their perspective.

And that ability is the reason why we like having these types of people around us … because the depth of a disaster is skewed by our perception of events. They know how to actually control perceptions <and therefore manage some attitudes>. Please note … these people do not seek disasters they simply are good in a disaster/crisis.

Anyway.

Any crisis is stressful <good manager around or not>. It’s easy to think that unrealistic deadlines, unforgiving bosses, and out-of-control traffic are the reasons we’re so stressed all the time. They are not … the stress is … well … self inflicted and not externally inflicted. Simplistically … more often than not you can’t control your circumstances but you can control how you respond to them. So before you spend too much time dwelling on something you should take a minute to put the situation in perspective.

If you aren’t sure when you need to do this, try looking for clues that your anxiety may not be proportional to the stressor <the asshole screaming ‘disaster’>. If you <or the screamer> are thinking in broad, sweeping statements such as “everything is going wrong” or “nothing will work out” I would suggest you need to reframe the situation in a little reality.

A great way to correct this unproductive thought pattern is to list the specific things that actually are going wrong or not working out. Most likely you will come up with just some things—not everything—and the scope of these stressors will look much more limited than it initially appeared.

Success seduces you into believing you are better than you are … failure reminds you that you aren’t better than you thought <as long as you don’t constantly blame everyone else for the failure>. Let’s call this in today’s post as “false gambler skill.’ This suggests that many of the self proclaimed ‘good in crisis people’ are the ones who define themselves by the disasters … and have a false sense of success from disasters <no wonder we hate these people in management>.

“Each success only buys an admission ticket to a more difficult problem.”

–

Henry Kissinger

This creates an interesting dynamic to disasters and Life. Because the bottom line for people is we like to win <or have success>. I imagine at some point it can become an addiction <hence this whole thought of creating disasters to solve – leading to create successes>. And this creates a corollary attitude. “I don’t lose.”

The tricky part about disasters is that someone typically loses. And everyone has a right to win <so it’s not like you – the proverbial you – has the corner on winning>.

And that is the sneaky bad side of disasters … they increase the emphasis on trying to win. But at some point you need to remember that it isn’t everything.

There is value in “a loss.” And that, my friends, is extremely difficult when you think of his from a ‘disaster’ perspective where most times you are just doing what you believe you need to do to survive. Yes. There is value in doing your best even if your best doesn’t translate into a win. But … whoa … this is a frickin’ disaster we are talking about <insert some exclamation points here>.

So.

That is common sense.

Uh oh.

But that ignores “personal” <self-esteem, peer/society pressure, societal expectations, etc.>. Because the transition between “I want to win therefore I won’t lose.” To “I lost.” THAT is a humdinger of a personal transition.

Worse?

When winning is familiar <like … you win a lot … often enough that a part of you kind of expects to win>. Winning is addictive. It seduces you on a number of levels. Even the suggestion of “what if I lose?” has become a huge issue in self-help diatribes in that “you need to think like a winner to be a winner.” It is frowned upon to be reflective upon losing.

I say all this because <1> disasters trigger survival instincts in which we tend t overlook “how you win” & associate “lose” with dying, <2> if you live Life managing disasters … ‘losing’ can seem like a disaster in and of itself.

And there begets the victory of soul and character even in losing within a crisis.

Finding victory in a loss within a disaster scenario is all about character. Not being too proud to even think about those things as well as accept loss. To find victory in the attempt is actually the thought. Survival, in & of itslef, can be viewed as a win.

In an odd way. Disasters themselves are seductive. Especially if you successfully navigate them.

Look.

Disaster or non disaster … don’t be seduced by success. Certainly you should celebrate it. Success deserves recognition. But more importantly remember something … in a race of 1000 people only one “wins” in the truest sense but I imagine that another 899 won in another way that made them feel pretty darn good and kept on going <and then there are 100 or so who just cannot accept ‘losing’ and are just plain losers>.

So.

Getting back to the main point of this.

Does this mean we should actually be seeking disaster <with the right mindset>?

Nope.

There is enough adversity in life & business that comes naturally … trust me … disasters <of any and all sizes> will appear at one time or another.

Just remember that most events in life, whether you call them a disaster or not, follow the basic cycle of “problem/situation/disaster – action – result”. I am tempted to call this a Life truth <but someone smarter than I will probably send me a note suggesting some exceptions>.

But suffice it to say that I struggle to find many actions without problems. And results are consequences of actions.

It doesn’t really matter <in this case> if the problems themselves may be imagined or real, because they are what we perceive and act on. Theoretically at no point in time do we seem to run out of problems that require solving. There is a seemingly endless array of things to worry about, things to pursue, things that are stopping us from pursuing … and things we regret <if we elect to regret them>.

Well. If you buy into that thought then that means we continuously engage in some action which is generating some outcome which in turn regenerates some new problem/situation/disaster.

Whew.

That is a painful thought. Maybe I should say … this is exactly how someone who lives, and thrives, on disasters thinks <I am not one … and I can honestly say it is painful putting myself in their shoes just to be able to write this>.

Some people might enjoy problem solving for the sheer enjoyment of it.

Others obsess with results, and their “ends” justify their “means”.

Yet others simply place the highest emphasis on action.

Each of these has its rewards.

Regardless. I tend to believe we just have to accept that Life is a series of disasters <oops … lessons>. Ignore that thought at your own peril … because ignorance is rarely bliss.

Always be conscious about what is happening to you and around you and try and recognize that disasters are simply lessons in the making. And these lessons are inevitably presented to you over and over … until you learn your lessons.

My point on this lesson thing?

You can either take the responsibility to take charge or be a victim of disaster. And there in lies the difference between those who define themselves by disaster and those who accept disasters as part of Life. The former make their disasters more important than the typically are and the latter manage disasters as stepping stones in Life.

Ok.

Let me end on a positive <versus disaster> but related to lessons of disasters.

I read somewhere that pleasure is always derived from something outside you … whereas joy arises from within. I like that thought. And, therefore, in seeking a substitute for joy … the mind will seek salvation or fulfillment through pleasure … or some external stimulation. Therein lies the root of everyone seeking to define themselves through disasters. It is a warped way to find pleasure.

Well.

We can save these people. We can save them if you understand the joy and pleasure equation … and help someone find ‘joy’ <however it may be defined>.

==

“There will never be a shortage of disasters, there will always be people who need to be rescued. And there will never ever be enough people to save them all.”

==

Some people need rescuing again and again. And some people drown over a full lifetime.

Life is full of disasters … real and unreal.

I don’t think anyone needs one to be defined as a part of Life … but they are simply part of Life whether you want, or need, them and therefore play a role in who and what you are. Frankly … where disasters truly show their true colors is not in our skills or some skill set you can try and claim … but instead it when we have survived the trial by fire where our real self gets to show itself. That’s where you get to show who you are. This is … well … character

Anyway.

I imagine … as with anything in your life … it is what you make of it. We don’t get defined by disasters but disasters can often define who you will be. Therein lies one of the great paradox in Life. <sigh> And I imagine because it is a paradox some people will enhance the personal drama to create some self worth while others will simply accept the challenge of disasters as … well … something called “Life.”

For the latter, well, just see the gobs of information and quotes online with regard to “if you aren’t moving forward you are standing still” … “don’t look back or you’ll miss what is in front of you” … “don’t look back you are not going that way” or some crap like that.

I would note we see all that … as if no one knows that movement, and progress, is good. But. that is the ‘forward progress theory’ business.

That said.

The bravest thing you can do is to not look back. Why do I say ‘brave’? We make it really hard to not look back. Really hard. Day in and day out everything around you pounds on you for what did you learn and how are you applying it and ‘if you don’t know that then how can you be sure that is the right thing to do?” … crap like that.

Okay.

Semi useful thinking crap like that.

But what it really means is that anyone truly desiring to move forward, intent on progress, keeps getting dragged back time and again to the past.

What, or who, is the main culprit of this almost unhealthy relationship with the past?

“Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to make the same mistakes.”

Christalmighty.“Doomed.”

No wonder people afraid of some risk or hesitate to move forward keep looking backwards. Doom is never a particularly desirable objective if you care about your career <or anything for that matter>.

The ‘doomed’ aspect <which older business people toss around like confetti in meetings> means we are almost demanded to not only invest energy in the past but, in some cases, encouraged to hold on to past learnings with ragged claws. That said … I will go back to the bravery aspect because I could argue the truest bravery, in this sense, resides in two places:

Not looking back once you have decided to move forward.

Not looking back when you purposefully stand still.

Yeah.

First. There are actually times to just go. Go and do. Maybe not ‘go’ as meant by leaning on instincts <I called it ‘decision faking by intuition‘ but research tends to show instincts are less important than experience> but lean on your experience to guide you through the context of your progress. The truth is that the past cannot show you all the shit you need to know as you move forward. It only shows aspects of shit you should be aware of. And, worse, the past has nasty habit of not encouraging you to reflect on the context of all the aspects just the aspects themselves. Therefore history is truly only important in parts and not the whole.

You have to grab the scraps of what you need from the past and create a new whole in moving forward. And that is where bravery steps up to the plate. More often than not you are creating a new whole … a slightly different version of what was. Yeah. That is different than the past <it s actually something new>. Yeah. Everyone is actually a creator, a discoverer … albeit we don’t like to think about that. While this point is a generalization … if you know your shit … once you have decided to go … to move forward … don’t look back. Bravely face the new world ahead.

Yeah.

Second. There are actually times to stop. Stand still. Even amidst activity. Even amidst a crowd which seems like it is moving forward <albeit sometimes all you see is the movement>.

Stillness, strategic stillness, is possibly one of the scariest things anyone can ever do. When everyone and everything is moving you feel like you are ding something wrong in standing still. And, yet, by purposefully doing so you may be adding to the progress rather than taking away from it.

Here is what I know about purposefully standing still.

You have to accept the fact you are offering the type of energy that no matter where you are and no matter that you are still & not moving you are actually adding value to the space and time and progress to that which is around you. I can promise you that this takes a version of bravery.

Anyway.

Forward progress is difficult. Difficult in the mind <attitudes> and even in practice <behavior>. I could argue that it is so difficult because our natural instinct is to try and use the past to define what the future will look like. That is slightly crazy when you think about it. While the arc of time dictates the future will most likely replicate the past … well … that is the arc and not the details. It’s kind of like discussing strategy versus tactics. The strategy may remain the same or similar, but the tactics will vary in the context of time & situation.

Forward progress does take some bravery … some courage. Mostly because the future will always contain something you have never seen before or faced before. In other words … it will not be the same as it was.

I don’t think I am particularly brave but I certainly don’t look back once I decide to go … and I have no qualms with standing still amidst movement. I tend to believe it is not bravery but rather experience.

Ah.

Experience.

Maybe you need to be brave to gain useful experience?

Ok.

That’s another post for another day ……..

===================

“Sometimes people let the same problem make them miserable for years when they could just say, ‘So what’.

“Don’t try to behave as though you were essentially sane and naturally good. We’re all demented sinners in the same cosmic boat — and the boat is perpetually sinking.”

—-

Aldous Huxley

=============

Ok.

This is about doing shit and doing the shit you really want to do … in business.

This is not about ‘finding your passion’ or ‘maximizing your potential’ … this is simply about something you actually decide you want to do … maybe something that is decided you should do … and are going to do.

Now.

I am sure I am going to completely bastardize the true meaning of this quote but I think about it with business in mind. This thought piece is a derivative of my “how far would you go to solve a problem” business thought.

In that piece I discussed saving your business. In this piece I am discussing saving your business objective or goal.

So.

Far too often businesses ‘hedge their bets’ against specific stretch goals & objectives. They sit in fancy conference rooms eating fancy snacks reviewing annual sales goals and business objectives and talk about ‘reaching high’ and then … well … blink. They start thinking, what they call, pragmatically … or practically.

Yeah.

They start ‘hedging.’ And when that happens not meeting the objective becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

What do I mean?

It is a tough, but reachable, objective and, yet, they don’t take the necessary complete steps to attain it. I am not suggesting this is easy.

Leading a business, particularly a larger one with some overarching politics and ‘management assessment mumbo jumbo’, is fraught with peril.

If you do what it takes to reach an objective and fall short … falling short looks … well … shorter. You invested and the investment REALLY did not pay off.

If you do what it takes to reach an objective and reach it … well … sometimes reaching it comes with a cost and your ROI don’t look as good as it could <by the way … this is a wacky version of “you did good … just not good enough”>.

Reality suggests to anyone with half a business brain that reaching true, not fake, stretch goals or aggressive objectives come at a cost. And that is where this Virgil quote comes into play. The Virgil quote is literally translated as “If I cannot deflect the will of superior powers, then I shall move the River Acheron” but more commonly translated as “If I cannot deflect the will of heaven, then I shall move hell.”

This is a version of “do what it takes to get where you want.”

I say that because I did a little research <mostly because I am not intellectual enough to actually read Virgil and like it>. Apparently in the Aeneid it is the goddess Juno who says this quote in a state of rage and defiance. She admits she doesn’t believe she can win but defiantly takes action anyway. Even better <to me> she is standing up against her peers … defending her right to do what she believes should be done, her own way, whether any of her peers approve.

And you know what?

If they do not approve, she will ignore them and “move the ancient river in her favor” … or … in my words … it becomes time to try and defy gravity.

She refuses to sit idle while others do nothing.

Look.

I will never <ever> suggest sacrificing values & ethics to win or reach an objective. My point is that to reach some objectives and aggressive goals you have to be defiant. You have to rebel against ‘hedging’ and sometimes you gotta step up and do what it takes. I do believe you can raise hell if heaven isn’t getting you where you need to be … without sacrificing ethics and values. And I do believe most managers in business need someone to rebel against their ‘fear of risk, failure, looking bad’ asses.

Anyway.

When I speak with businesses about the only thing I can tell them for sure … is that the future is uncertain. But I can also tell the with certainty that if history is a guide then we who are defiant, are determined, and do whatever it takes are the ones who push through the seemingly impossible and make it possible.

If you are a maker, a builder, an architect of fate … you do not hedge your bets nor do you let resources sit idle in inaction and, frankly, sit in inability to do shit that may assist in … well … doing shit.

=========

“I shall find a way or make one.”

—

Robert Peary

=====

At some point in business you are forced to pick a side, pick a battle and pick a moment.

At some point in business you are forced to steer … or be steered.

At some point in business you are an architect of your own fate or fate will build you.

At some point in business you are forced to face adversity or be suffocated by that which stands in your way.

That said.

I could argue that the real difference in business remains one simple distinction. Those people who do something and those people who do nothing.

Ok.

Maybe the real difference in business is those people who do something when an aggressive goal is placed in front of them and those who people who do … well … less than it takes. And that is where determination steps into this discussion.

Because ‘less than’, in business, is clever. It can cleverly disguise itself in little line items and subtle decisions to hold back little things in reserve.

=====

“You give up the world line by line.

Stoically.

And then one day you realize that your courage is farcical.

It doesn’t mean anything. You’ve become an accomplice in your own annihilation and there is nothing you can do about it. Everything you do closes a door somewhere ahead of you.

And finally there is only one door left.”

Cormac McCarthy

======

Without really intending to subvert your effort to attain some sales goal you ultimately give up your objective line by line. In other words … you’ve become an accomplice in your own annihilation.

What is maybe worse than that?

As you hedge your bets you actually close door after door that maybe could have led you to your goal. Without steadfast determination, and maybe a little defiance to safe business protocol, you will inevitably find yourself standing at the only door left available for you … not reaching the goal and having excuses as to why you didn’t reach an aggressive goal.

Your main excuse? You were less aggressive than you needed to be to reach the aggressive goal.

I will conclude with the obvious.

Writing about this is easy.Doing what needs to be done is hard.

All I can suggest is that you tie your values and ethics on tight … and then go raise hell if heaven ain’t helping you make the objective.

All I can suggest is if you are in a position to actually do something just make sure you look in the mirror and make sure you are not an accomplice to your own annihilation.

All I can suggest is that if you want something, really want to DO something, more often than not … in most businesses which tend to be either lethargic or less than efficient … you got to aggressively create your own path.

Robert Frost epitaph quoting the last line from his poem “The Lesson for Today”

==

Well.

I have a lover’s quarrel with the world.

And, frankly, I like it.

Some people suggest it is just being contrarian … and others suggest it is ‘bull in a china shop’ living.

Maybe.

Maybe to both.

But think about this … to me ‘bull in a china shop’ kind of implies that there is this random china shop and for some reason a bull wanders in <that bull would be me in this metaphor>. But … suppose it is actually the other way? Suppose you have a bull. The bull is … well … a bull. It lives its life. It’s content. It’s comfortable being a … well … a bull. Then Life comes along and builds a frickin’ china shop around it. Not just surrounded by fences … but within a china shop … caged … contained … restrained … pick your word here … the bull is unable to move without breaking something.

What does that mean? Simple normal everyday actions are now destructive.

And yet … the bull is simply being a bull. Just being kind of what it was brought in this world to be.

Well.

I like turning it around this way <it makes me feel slightly better>. I like it because it permits me to quarrel with the world … and be in the right. Oh. Right being defined as being myself.

Regardless.

If you accept the turned around thought I shared … well … this may surprise you but … acceptance becomes a key thought and mindset.

Yeah.

Acceptance.

I know that sounds odd because we are talking about possibly crashing around and breaking shit. But the thought is that if you are a bull you accept the reality of the world that is constraining the reality of you.

Now. Please understand. Acceptance is not the decision to do nothing. Acceptance is simply … well … acceptance. It is simply the intention to agree with reality. Accepting what is <and what is not>.

I say this even as a true Life contrarian … because I honestly can say that have never found a time where it was better to disagree with reality. It is always easier to agree with reality … and then start ‘doing.’ Acceptance simply means permitting the present to exist … no matter how painful. Which then leads me to the thought that there is a difference between pain and suffering.Acceptance suggests you eliminate the suffering aspect because … well … Life is what it is. Maybe painful … but not worth suffering over.

Anyway.

Circling back to the bull <as in me>. Life is a china shop and … well … I can’t build a whole new shop for Life … I just have to learn how to live within it.

That is acceptance.

And acceptance that, in some odd way, makes Life bearable. I can keep moving and taking action. I can keep … well … quarreling with the world.

Even better? My actions are derived from an intent to ‘do’ … whatever that doing is … and with a recognition that I will probably break some shit <and have to pay for it> and not driven by some reactive sense of desperate avoidance to not break shit or be constantly aggravated with Life being a frickin’ china shop.

Now.

You would tend to think that accepting the realness of reality is something we would do automatically.

We don’t.

This may sound obtuse … but in actually living it <this acceptance thing> … I can tell you that thinking this way is quite freeing. Because Life can be painful at times and, yet, I have also found that mostly it is painful only because you are in conflict with what Life seems to be demanding of you. So maybe if you can imagine that by accepting the pain as natural … as just part of who you are and the choices you make … you actually limit the pain to such a level it is almost unnoticeable.

Oh. In the cases in which the pain doesn’t recede? Well … you end up fighting back against Life a little bit. And I will note … in most cases you are simply fighting inertia. Inertia as in ‘the wrong type of acceptance.’ In fact … i am wrong .. its not acceptance … it is acquiescence <acquiescence as an overall societal default mechanism>. This is where people simply cease to fight against what they see as an inevitable outcome.

All that said.

It seems like I am talking about some form of ignorance. And I am. In this case it is self ignorance. Ignorant with regard to self-awareness or just ignorant of reality <knowledge and facts and truth and shit like that>.

An ignorance of maybe our personal Life default mechanism.

I imagine the real issue behind ignorance is … well … a natural irrationality. We humans like to think of ourselves as a smart thoughtful intuitive group.

In general … we are not.

For example.

A psychologist described how people are fairly good at predicting the outcome of elections based solely on photographs of the candidates. Well. This is slightly disturbing in that it suggests no matter how much we analyze what a person stands for that a significant part of our choice behavior falls back on some subconscious instinctual gut feeling … that are in many cases typically not rational.

Another example.

Think you can change a friend’s mind about an important issue? Think again. Psychological research suggests the existence of something called the ‘backfire effect.’ This is when by simply mentioning facts that another person won’t like … it will cause ‘double down behavior’ on their original position.

Well.

That sucks. No wonder all of us have some level of a ‘lover’s quarrel with the world.’

Anyway.

This subconscious irrationality seems to reside in the fact that we people are really really good at utilizing an innate default mechanism … either too afraid or too oblivious to make major changes to our attitudes & beliefs. It is an unfortunate truth that it is part of our natural cultural DNA that we do a whole bunch of maintaining, rationalizing, procrastinating and reinforcing … suffice it to call it “embracing the status quo” type stuff.

Sorry to tell you … but … we don’t really do very much thinking about what’s really best for us and the possibly more drastic changes we might need to make to get there. We do some surface type thinking but not the real deep hard thinking.

So what does this mean?

If you don’t quarrel with the world on occasion you simply let Life dictate your … well … life.

By the way.

Please note the ‘love’ in the quarrel thought.

I love Life.

I love the world in which we live.

Does that mean I like it unchanged? Absolutely not. I want to change things … and attitudes and behaviors … and therefore I have a lover’s quarrel.

Maybe I am crazy.

Maybe it comes down to a crazy personal attitude:

==========

“Do I dare … dare disturb the universe?”

–

TS Eliot

===========

Whoa.

Disturbing the universe. Quarreling with Life on occasion. That’s … well … crazy.

Look.

I tend to think it is fairly typical for us to feel like something is missing or unsettled in our lives. I know I do on occasion. I also think it is fairly typical that even though we feel that way … at any given time … the idea of making any type of major change will tend to seem out of the question. I know I do on occasion.

I tend to believe it is is because you believe you are … well … what you’ve been doing this whole time. I know I do on occasion.

I tend to believe we recognize that something missing and yet we make no real meaningful change <for a variety of good … and not so good … reasons>.

Well.

This paradox … which is actually quite natural in our attitudes & behavior … kind of makes the entire thought of continuing with the way things are … maintain the status quo … well … seem a little absurd.

The fact is you are naturally disturbing the universe … at least your own universe. Identity is not static … it is fluid.

You are constantly becoming a new version of yourself … a different person. Yeah. Dramatic changes may actually be necessary to realign with ‘the world.’ In fact … what you feel is ‘missing’ may simply a reflection of the fact that your new version is out of sync with the world and Life. In my words … you are quarreling with the world for the wrong reasons. I say all this psychological mumbo jumbo because this takes some self awareness. It certainly takes battling self ignorance. And inevitably this takes into account self doubt … and <by the way> self doubt exists in everyone.

Well.

Let’s just say it exists within everyone who tries to live their life with some integrity or values.

Because if you don’t care about your ‘output’ <however output is manifested in your daily life … including your actions> being good … and are okay that being bad is just fine … self-doubt has nothing to attach itself to.

Ok.

All that said.

Quarreling with the world.

Disturbing the universe.

We humans ignore all sorts of things that don’t fit our conceptual structures <heads and how we think>. Quarreling is often simply natural chafing against paradigms. And paradigms are a reflection of the defaults we fall into. Some psychologist suggested that paradigm shifts in human societies aren’t made incrementally, but rather in great leaps:

————–

During the period of normal science, the failure of a result to conform to the paradigm is seen not as refuting the paradigm, but as the mistake of the researcher. As anomalous results build up, science reaches a crisis, at which point a new paradigm, which subsumes the old results along with the anomalous results into one framework, is accepted. This is termed revolutionary science.

This negates the truth value of any given idea — but simultaneously demands adjustments of the most dissonant “truth”. Adjustments can employ tactics such as appeals to spiritual beliefs, peer pressure, neglect or diminishing of significance (and vice versa), discrediting a source or messenger, reliance upon tradition, appeal to authority, etc.

——————-

Well.

Those words also apply to us … people .. not just research.

… demands adjustments of the most dissonant “truth.”

Wow.

That’s us people. We need a crisis of anomalous data before we accept change. Therefore … dramatic changes are not just quarrels with the world but arguments. Heated debates.

Look.

I imagine my unending quarrel with the world is one that many have. Some are simply more vocal than others … some get tired more easily than others in the quarrel.

I also imagine just to keep my sanity that I embrace the thought that maybe it is simply part of who I am that I see myself freed of what may often be seen as natural boundaries all with the hope to someday reach a larger vision of possibilities. I certainly do not seek to imply simple optimism or a some utopia to be arrived at in the distant future. It is simply the journey to something better.

Better than what is today.

Maybe I quarrel with the world because today’s world can be a harsh and difficult one scattered with cruel weather surrounding character and soul. And I accept the pain as I sometimes stumble down a path can be strewn with ruins of what was … and outdated cultural monuments.

I like to think I reject the past … and embrace the past … at exactly the same time.

============

“Beyond the wall another wall, on the wall stopped dead one sentinel.”

—-

Regina Derieva

============

I accept the walls.

I accept the sentinels who stand watch over the status quo.

I accept the china shop.

Maybe I just like to think of it as larger with new freshly painted walls. And maybe I simply am quarreling with the dead sentinels standing upon the walls.

I have a lovers quarrel with the world.

I do the best that I can.

I take solace in something Augusten Burroughs said:

===============

“I myself am made entirely of flaws, stitched together with good intentions.”

===============

I am flawed … I have good intentions … and I will quarrel with the world.

Look.

I know that the world is a good ‘quarreler.’

It challenges, tries to push you down and sometimes makes you feel like there is no hope.

No hope for being better.

No hope for change.

Me?

In acceptance I find some type of courage <not sure that is the right word> to defeat these feelings.

I am flawed. But I know I have a good intentions.

Now.

That’s got to count for something in a lover’s quarrel. Because, well, I have a lover’s quarrel with the world.

Is it fear of losing ourselves? Until we do lose ourselves there is no hope of finding ourselves.

————-

Henry Miller

============

So.

Wimp. Gutless. Chicken. Wuss. Namby pamby. Spineless jellyfish.

Pick your word.

That is what business has become.

Yeah. I know. Harsh.

Go boldly is just not a phrase you hear often in business anymore.

Not even whispered.

Heck.

Not even kiddingly.

Instead we use words like ‘managing risk’ or ‘planned change’ or “restrained response is necessary” or “we need to follow the process” or … well … any other chicken shit scared-to-do-what-needs-to-be-done word or phrase.

Now.

To be clear.

Everyone talks about being brave … “let’s be bold”. Yeah. Everyone sits in meetings and waves their hands enthusiastically or look around sternly making statements and actually talk about bold thinking and bold moves and … well … being bold. Attend any planning meeting or transition meeting or change meeting … well … pretty much any meeting in a business office and at some point someone will throw the ‘let’s be bold’ card out onto the table.

What happens next?

Everyone looks as Bold sits there on the table within the reach of anyone. Sitting there on a plate like everyone’s favorite donut … while everyone looking at it is on a diet.

Oh, so tasty.

Oh, I can’t touch it.

This most typically happens in some snazzy meeting room and when someone starts talking about the direction of the business and change but it also comes up when talking about some new initiative, some new ‘creative thinking’ or … well … anything that may appeal to younger employees.

Conceptually … the desire is there … so why is there no real bold behavior?

We are in a mamby pamby business world.

We are in a ‘let’s stick with the tried & true <safe> to maintain whatever growth we just celebrated in our last meeting” <which was most likely really crappy but justified by a verbal ‘better than the competition’> world. We are in a “let’s be edgy but don’t scare off any potential customers” <which those people most likely aren’t a viable revenue stream anyway> world.

Unfortunately for these spineless shits sitting around conference tables … reality in today’s business world is that we are actually in a “smart bold actions at the smartest time” <but … uhm ,.. apparently no one is smart enough – bold enough? – to identify the smart time>.

It sucks.

We are now living in a “rationalize minuscule change as bold actions’ business world. It is demoralizing as well as a less than effective business strategy.

All that said.

This lack of boldness strikes deepest during transitions and change. And I can logically explain why.

Change in business scares the shit out of any manager & leader.

Okay.

It scares the shit out of 99% of business people <mostly the older more experienced>.

Yeah, yeah, yeah … change sounds great but in practice it is … well … a shitload like chaos. You plan but as soon as transition hits its full stride the plan is … well … no longer a plan.

Ok.

It is the remnants of a plan.

This means … well … many managers are left with scraps of a plan in their hands and this means that many managers are left to make their own decisions and left to their own devices. This also means that many managers find out they are gutless chicken shits.

Why do I say that?

In their minds ‘go boldly’ is defined by “implement the plan.” Boldly implement the plan to the nth degree.

Without a plan?

The cold fear of the unknown and being unsure freezes boldness.

<sigh>

Wimps.

We have become a business world of wimps.

And this lack of a bold muscle can cost you in a variety of ways.

If you do not go boldly you will not only never find success … ,frankly, you will also ever find “you” , as in yourself, as in “what I am capable of.”

By the way … bold does not mean ‘stupid’.

Bold simply means attempting to control your destiny – your personal one and your business one. And in doing so … well … you are letting the chips fall as they may by managing the chips as well as you can.

Kairos is the ability to adapt to and take advantage of changing circumstances.

The concept suggests you have an opportunity to manage what fate has in store for you … if you manage the circumstances as they arise.

And how does this relate to ‘be bold’?

Well.

Kairos suggests that fate has a whole array of possibilities to shove your way – not just one in particular. Uhm. That means if you buy that thought … well … depending on what you do and how you act and what you say … uhm … Fate just may end up offering you a possibility other than what it thought it was going to offer you a moment ago.

This also suggests some boldness increases the odds in your favor with regard to fate. I personally do not think this is ‘fate favors the brave.’ I believe it is less about bravery and more about simply boldly acting upon what your experience suggests is the way to go as a way of managing your Fate.

I could argue that 90%+ of business people do not balk at the idea of ‘being bold’ … but balk at actually being bold.

I could argue that the % may even go up higher during business transition <change> times.

Yeah.

Even with a real challenge and the authority and space to operate “bold” is unfortunately very very low on the list of business behavioral attitudes.

What is high on the list?

“Restrained response” …

“Restrained behavior”

“Restrained risk.”

I have one word for you.

Wimps.

“Restrained” is for all the fucking wimps.

Look.

We need more smart bold non-wimps in today’s business world.

We need less chicken shit, scared to move, business managers and more bold managers who seek possibilities with a 360 degree view … without restraint … and the desire to do the right smart thing in any direction.

On a side note … better than any whizbang cultural “happiness mojo” initiatives … being bold, embracing bravery within the business actions, will increase the energy of the organization, attract young people & increase overall productivity.

“…can I tell you something…? I don’t think you’re in love with the past.

I think you’re scared of the future.”

―

Brad Meltzer

=====

Well.

Generational business visions. What I mean by that is while businesses chug along making money, or not making money, how they make their money changes by generation.

Back in august 2013 I described what I called “the evolution of business vision” suggesting that there is a generational shift occurring in how people in business are viewing business. I attached to that thought a belief that the 50somethings were an impediment to progress and, in particular, the progress that the younger business generation offers businesses.

I believe all of that even more so today.

Organizations are adapting how they attack business purpose, vision and outcomes <measurement & attitude> driven by the rising younger people who view it significantly different that the existing older management.

This is creating a natural friction with the impatience of the rising and the lack of impatience to change by those in power … in addition … there is a natural friction found in how an organization assimilates the new and the old <and the necessary experience needed to make it happen> to make the well needed changes for progress.

This is attitudinal stuff we have always dealt with in business as we churned thru generations.

What do I mean?

All generations are shaped by the generations that came before

All rising generations want to shape the future based on how they have been shaped <and it will not be the same as those who shaped their thinking>

All generations currently in place will want to shape the rising generations based on past learnings <and it will most likely contain unattractive features to the rising generation>

Where I truly believe the new well-needed vision shift is running into an obstacle is with ‘respect.’

And oddly … I will suggest it isn’t that the young should respect the old … but rather the opposite. I believe the 50somethings need to get their proverbial heads out of their asses and develop some respect for the young and what they can do <that we cannot>.

Show them respect and I imagine they will show us respect <if we have the ability to actually, authentically, deliver respect with the right attitude>.

Sorry to tell the older folk but … well … if two generations are to have respect for one another … the younger generation will have to believe the older generation has some value <in what they offer> and listen to it.

Now.

I admit.

I write all of this fearing we 50somethings are losing their respect. We have always been old and less adaptable … but now we are truly becoming an impediment to progress <or getting better>.

The obstacle mentality may have something to do with attitude, and pride, but to get to the core of what this is all about you really need to discuss money … not only how we personally get paid <earnings & wealth> but also how the company gets paid <profits, ROI, revenue, growth, etc.>. And I say that wishing more business people would talk about this issue rather than “selfish, lazy, entitled’ younger people and “old, out of touch, tech amateur” older folk.

Money, and how it is viewed, is the issue

Basically I believe that the demands of managing business has evolved generation to generation … bloated dollar management to squeezed dollar management to … well … I sense it will be something like the ‘added value’ dollar management in the near future <if the 50somethings help with some progress>.

The following chart diagrams my entire thought process:

Here is the explanation behind the diagram. The current 50something management generation is literally and figuratively the generation that got squeezed. What I mean by that is this was the generation who had to learn how to do more with less and get more with less. This was the generation who was also demanded to generate more profits and sales increases … with that same ‘less’.

To do that we … well … we maintained the same business models and the same business processes <to a large extent> and then simply squeezed dollars and organizations for everything they had. This meant, as we squeezed things into each dollar. we squeezed out EVERYTHING of intangible substance <purpose, integrity, ‘doing the right thing’, soul, etc.>.

Yup.

If there is anything this current older management generation understands better … I don’t know what it is … they understand the concept of the squeezed dollar and squeezed organizations. They had to figure it out because they had to adapt to what the economic environment demanded <or be killed if you don’t>.

That said. This means the burden, what they know and believe is the way to do things, of this business generation is the squeezed dollar. They arrived in their situation because the boomer business leader generation was more about ‘the bloated dollar.’ They overcharged and built brands & businesses based on excess <and encouraged a belief there was value in excess> and, yes, offered some good products & services along the way.

I will note everyone, in both of these generations, typically made a lot of money. Yeah. This generation of 50something business leaders has already made a lot of money. The one before, let’s call it the boomer business leader, made even more.

And each made it differently.

Boomers thrived on the bloated dollar.

The bloated dollar was when companies could charge whatever they wanted and got it. Project estimates contained ‘fat’ <or ‘fluff’ or ‘padding’> to absorb unforeseen changes or challenges and buyers assumed the price was what the price was.

The current generation of business leaders has had to thrive in a ‘squeezed dollar’ environment.

The squeezed dollar is the unfortunate byproduct from the boomer generation leaders’ wonderful success … the financial community demanded the same results … but the consumer demanded transparency.

Therefore in order to maintain continuous sales growth <which is actually a relatively ludicrous concept> and continuous profitability the current business leader had to find ways to squeeze the same profit/growth out of less dollars <cutting staff while cutting prices while cutting … and cutting … and … well … cutting>.

Ok.

I say all this to get to where we will go and why there is so much conflict in the business world.

Suffice it to say that economic pressure creates a certain type of management style in order to be successful. 50somethings learned on the job and actually were quite successful maintaining the boomer ‘earn as much as I can’ attitude <a version of extravagant desire for more> as well as working leaner <on the edge of what an organization is actually capable of>. Unfortunately for the business world … the next generation of business leaders want something different <and they should … because where do you go after a bloated dollar and then a squeezed dollar?>.

The next generation? <the current ‘youth’>

They really don’t like either the financial ‘squeezed/lean’ aspect or the organizational aspect tied to the financial earnings attitude.

Therefore, in my opinion, the young <who are obviously chafing under the existing management style> will most likely swing to what I call the ‘added value’ dollar. It suggests accommodating attitudes beyond simple profit <and purpose driven value> as well as simple positioning companies by ‘de-commoditizing’ within industries <rebuilding value beyond lowest price>.

What I mean by this is that they want businesses to swing operationally back toward a ‘bloated dollar’ construct but stuff the ‘bloat’ not with any padded financial aspects but rather with some purposeful aspects which encourage employees to think, and know, that they are part of a ‘good capitalism’ rather than a simple ‘morally hollow’ capitalism.

Anyway.

Regardless whether my prediction is correct or not … what is correct is that the 50something business management objectives are not aligned with the younger generation objective desires. And that lack of alignment pertains to both management style as well as corporate objectives.

This is an issue.

It is an issue not just because older managers want to manage misaligned with what the people doing the shit find any passion or interest in but it is incredibly likely the older manager is speaking a different language than the younger generation.

This is NOT a generational issue, this is a business philosophy issue.

Fortunately, I do believe it is easily solvable.

Me?

Oddly <and maybe surprisingly> I would follow the money.

Stop talking about feelings and ‘features’ and flexible hours and laptop/tablets for all and free lunches and start talking about doing what a business should do well – make money and make money you are proud of.

Maybe I could call this substantive productivity or possibly substantive profit or maybe i could just call it “meaningful business” but what i would call it is a productive business strategy because it engages intrinsic motivation.

===========

In 1949, Harry F Harlow, Professor of Psychology at the University of Wisconsin, outlined something called “intrinsic motivation” … or the joy of the task itself. Research reflects that for most complex tasks intrinsic motivation is a much more powerful drive than any external motivator. More than money or tangible reward.

So I thought I had left the whole right brain left brain discussion behind.

And it reared its ugly head again one more time just the other day. And <distressingly> it was in a business environment, with senior people, discussing people’s strengths & weaknesses.

Look.

This whole right brain, left brain thing about creativity versus ‘logical’ thinking has to stop.

Stop … now <please>.

The truth?

We use our whole brain for thinking. Not halves. And right brain left brain mumbo jumbo is just that … a bunch of mumbo jumbo crap.

Yup.

The whole thing is bullshit.

Trust me <you don’t really have to because I will share reasons why you should>. And if you don’t believe me … well … if you ever want to drive a psychologist/psychiatrist/neurologist/any ‘ist’ crazy … bring it up.

With that … a reminder on what his whole thing is. In the right-left mythology … the left brain is logical, ordered, and analytic, and it supports reading, speech, math, and reasoning. In the same myth … the right brain is more oriented towards feelings and emotions, spatial perception, and the arts, and is said to be more creative.

Well.

Interesting myth. And it is just a myth. It is wrong (wrong & wrong … and maybe even wrong again).

And we have actually known for at least 30 years that this characterization is incorrect.

In fact the guy who probably put us all in this mess originally <Mike Gazzaniga who created the study in the 60’s that some pop psychologist used to write some fantasy-like left/right brain business books that became best sellers> who was a pioneer of modern study of brain hemispheric differences immediately tried to put a stop to the craziness as soon as it began with a book chapter titled “Left brain, right brain: A debunking.”

And he did that 25 years ago.

<note: he wrote it because the original crap was begun after he did a brain hemisphere study in the 60’s>

And, yet, there is still plenty of bunk to go around.

Its crazy.

I myself have gnashed my teeth <and sometimes growled> against the “left brain / right brain” myth for years <probably not 25 but a bunch>. It usually is personal <and I believe this is so for most people>. People are always trying to tell me how “right-brained” I am <or left … I get confused>.

Which I always find amusing since whatever I am doing invariably needs whatever the other side of the brain was supposed to be doing.

Plus. I would like to think I am using my whole frickin’ brain.

But.

It mostly aggravates me ,and kind of disturbs me> because it is deliberately misleading.

It has been used to support endless management dialogue telling us that we should liberate ourselves from too much left-brain ‘logical’ thinking and enjoy the fruits of our liberated, right-brained creativity <or vice versa depending on your management belief system>.

Look.

People may be inherently more visual, aural, spatial, sequential, intuitive, rational <or irrational> talented or non-talented … but it ain’t because of anything to do with left versus right brain.

Ok.

If you don’t trust me I pulled this from a medical journal.

A more technical explanation of how the whole thing went haywire:

==

You’ve probably heard this left/ right brain dichotomy before. It goes something like this: the left hemisphere of the brain is logical, deductive, mathematical, etc., while the right hemisphere is artistic, visual and imaginative. The idea stems at least partly from the classic studies of split brain patients performed by Sperry and Gazzaniga in the 1960s.

There are some functional asymmetries in the brain, and it is true that certain regions of both hemispheres are specialized for particular functions. Speech illustrates this, but also shows that nothing is ever so simple when it comes to the brain: in most right-handed people, speech is processed in both hemispheres, but predominantly in the left. In some left-handers, speech is processed either predominantly in the right hemisphere or on both sides.

So the notion that someone is “left-brained” or “right-brained” is absolute nonsense. All complex behaviours and cognitive functions require the integrated actions of multiple brain regions in both hemispheres of the brain. All types of information are probably processed in both the left and right hemispheres (perhaps in different ways, so that the processing carried out on one side of the brain complements, rather than substitutes, that being carried out on the other).

An article was published this week in the venerable (and reliable) psychology journal Psychological Bulletin, which synthesized 67 brain imaging studies of creativity. Among other things, it showed that creativity is not especially a right-brain function. In fact, two of three broad classes of creative thought that have been studied seem not to depend on a single set of brain structures.

What we call “creativity” is so diverse that it can’t be localized in the brain very well.

One might think that this study would put to rest at least part of the left brain/right brain mythology, namely, that the right hemisphere of the brain is more responsible for creative thought than the left.

One would think so, but I wouldn’t count on it.

==

My conclusion?

I put the whole right/left brain thing in the same category as reading a horoscope or reading my own tarot cards. If you give someone a vague positive description in which they can see themselves they will tend to agree with you. And that is dangerous on a number of levels <if people actually believe it>.

Ok.

Here is the main reason I bring this up <beyond the fact it drives me crazy and it is still being seriously discussed in the business world>. It has a detrimental effect on education and how we manage our youth. It is as bad as social profiling when it comes to kids.

Left brain kid.

Right brain kid.

You carry that label and not only does the child begin to see themselves in that label <it is kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy> the adults tag the child with the label. And start treating them that way. And expecting things based on the labeling.

All of a sudden the child is placed on the left, or right, brain treadmill <oops … I meant to say moving sidewalk>.

And then they are left there.

Uh oh.

One day the child wants to jump off the treadmill to hop on the other one for a while … <adults> “whoa … get back on your treadmill … you know that other one is only for the right brainers … and you will be much more successful on the left brain treadmill <sidewalk>.”

That, my friends, reads scary even if it seems just a theory.

And we all know that at some place, at some time, with some children … this is actually happening.

We need to squash this left/right brain myth forever. Now <please … again>.

We use all of our brain.

Brains are ambidextrous.

And even if you, personally, do not want to believe this, well, please … at least teach kids that is is so.

====================================

“Rabbit’s clever,” said Pooh thoughtfully.“Yes,” said Piglet, “Rabbit’s clever.”“And he has Brain.”“Yes,” said Piglet, “Rabbit has Brain.”There was a long silence.“I suppose,” said Pooh, “that that’s why he never understands anything.”

Knowledge of Botany: Variable. Well up in belladonna, opium, and poisons generally. Knows nothing of practical gardening.

Knowledge of Geology: Practical but limited. Tells at a glance different soils from each other. After walks has shown me splashes upon his trousers, and told me by their colour and consistence in what part of London he had received them.

Knowledge of Chemistry: Profound.

Knowledge of Anatomy: Accurate but unsystematic.

Knowledge of Sensational Literature: Immense. He appears to know every detail of every horror perpetrated in the century.

Plays the violin well.

Is an expert singlestick player, boxer, and swordsman.

Has a good practical knowledge of British law.”

―

Arthur Conan Doyle <A Study in Scarlet>

==================

So.

I am not sure if it is that I am of an age where my experiences have become varied enough that I chafe on being slotted in some form of ‘what you do’ or if I am of an age where many of the people I know get frustrated that they are demanded to define themselves, careerwise, in some simplistic way.

All that said.

I found myself in an odd alternative universe writing a core “here is why I have created this site and initiative” for someone I respect … and it was written for him but easily expressed my own situation.

After I sent him what I had scribbled I went back and I replaced his field with mine and … well … I found I was writing about my frustrations were which his … as well as a number of people I know:

====================

This site is borne of my frustration with explaining I am more than an advertising guy.

This site is borne of a belief that there is a community of advertising guys/gals who not only know they are more than advertising people but they also know they would like to use the skills they have in a business world which they see as needing what they have to offer.

This site is borne of what I know to be true – many of us are not simply advertising people, we are tinkers, tailors, soldiers & spies … all in one.

For some of us it gets frustrating to explain just because I have my MBA and am an experienced advertising guy that I am more than just that.

I get frustrated when my degree defines me.

I get frustrated when my industry experience label defines what my skills are.

I get frustrated that what I do, or have tangibly done, defines what I am capable of.

I get frustrated because I know how to ask the hard questions which often offer the hardest answers – the right things to do <which I believe businesses are desperate for this skill>.

I get frustrated because I know that “the truth is” is rarely the truth and I know that truths are often misty and multiple, like ghosts.

I get frustrated because I know all that I just wrote is a reflection of a thinking skill, a problem solving skill, a business skill and not just an advertising skill.

I get frustrated because I am more than an advertising guy and I know many people are frustrated by being slotted so simplistically.

To me, the world is too quick to define people and their skills in a simplistic way — simplistically by what they do <on the surface> and what specific skills they have acquired. People are often more complex than the labels they carry along with them and skills are often more translatable, with surprisingly positive outcomes, than many people are willing to think about.

It is our own fault because we have bludgeoned it into everyone’s head that everyone has to be a specialist or have some specific skill and, therefore, if you cannot simply define your specialty or skill you are … well … of less worth than someone who can.

That is, frankly, silly if not ludicrous.

Here is what I know.

I am more than an advertising guy. I am a tinker, tailor soldier and spy.

And I am building a community of likeminded people with a desire to go beyond simply being defined by the degree they earned and what labels people put on them to reach out into a business world, which may not know they need our skills at the moment, and show them there is a group of overlooked people who have skills to offer which businesses can benefit from.

============

tin·ker

ˈtiNGkər/

noun: tinker; plural noun: tinkers

1.

(especially in former times) a person who travels from place to place mending metal utensils as a way of making a living.

a person who makes minor mechanical repairs, especially on a variety of appliances and apparatuses, usually for a living.

2.

an act of attempting to repair something.

tai·lor

ˈtālər/

noun: tailor; plural noun: tailors

1.

a person whose occupation is making fitted clothes such as suits, pants, and jackets to fit individual customers.

Soldier

Noun

A soldier is one who fights as part of an organised, land based, sea based and air based armed force.

spy

spī/

noun: spy; plural noun: spies

1.

a person who secretly collects and reports information on the activities, movements, and plans of an enemy or competitor.

=============

Sigh.

I am fairly sure I am not in the majority in that the bulk of the world tends to acquire specific skills but I do believe the majority of generalists get unfairly squeezed into some incredibly uncomfortable boxes simply because the world just doesn’t seem to believe a generalist has the same value as a specialist.

It is frustrating.

To be clear … a qualified generalist doesn’t claim to be able to do everything.

I am not qualified to be a CFO <although I understand what CFOs do and what they say>.

I am not qualified to be some social media strategist <although I understand what they do and what they say>.

I am not qualified to … well … you get the point.

But from a generalist perspective I am qualified to talk about effective marketing, advertising and communications in any industry <even if I have never worked specifically in that industry>.

But from a generalist perspective I am qualified to talk about effective company vision, objectives, strategies and how to grow sales & retention in any industry <even if I have never worked specifically in that industry>.

But from a generalist perspective I am qualified to talk about positioning products & services, behavioral economics, the emotional & functional reasons people do things as well as using those things in making the hard business decisions which guide businesses toward success in any industry <even if I have never worked specifically in that industry>.

But from a generalist perspective I am qualified to dabble in almost any topic in any industry on any issue and use that ‘dabbling’ to make some relevant points based on some seemingly disparate type knowledge.

===============

“You know about fixing cars, you’re athletic, and you know when to shut up.”